No Bounce for Obama! by Former Author | Jun 17, 2008 | Barack Obama, The Clintons | 40 comments Posted by Former Author on 17 June, 2008 at 9:04 pm. 40 comments already! [DELETED BY AUTHOR] 40 Comments jainphx on June 17, 2008 at 10:00 pm The only bounce that Oshamamessiah deserves is out the door. Can you believe the communist bull he’s been putting down. He makes a very weak McCain look like superman, and that ain’t easy. Reply doug on June 17, 2008 at 10:56 pm It’s the while males dems that supported Hillary that aren’t ready to support Obama. McCain has 20 plus points over O. in this category. It’s unfair to speculate this early if they will move to O. or not; it’s been less than two weeks where O. has not had a primary opponent. One has to remember all the chatter from Rush, Anne, Hannity and all the others when McCain got his prize; over time the chatter died the seas calmed his points went up. The same patience in time should be given to O. Without this “decompression” period you’re missing an event variable in the trend. Reply Mike's America on June 17, 2008 at 11:21 pm Doug: It was Obama’s advisers who set this up this expectation of a 10 point bump within two weeks of Hillary’s suspending her campaign. I guess that leaves you folks another three days to bring it about. Good luck! Reply salvage on June 18, 2008 at 4:39 am Of course McCain is going to win, Obama is far too smart for the average American and McCain just dumb enough. Reply Uddercha0s on June 18, 2008 at 5:19 am Of course McCain is going to win, Obama is far too smart for the average American and McCain just dumb enough. We’s didn’t get no chance to study histury. If us dum ones just culd have had a betur edukasihun maybee we’d be Obama voters two. Us unwasrshed ones were tought he’s one of dem Marksist tipe people. Go read a book. Reply Buzz on June 18, 2008 at 5:29 am Of course McCain is going to win, Obama is far too smart for the average American and McCain just dumb enough. The man who hasn’t got a clue of how his spiritual mentors and friends of 20 years preach and believe is smart? The man that wants to leave Iraq but will return if Al Qaeda shows up there, but they are already there, is smart? The man who doesn’t even take the time to research if we have captured all the ’93 WTC bombers before running his mouth is smart? I don’t think salvage is on the right side of the bell curve for American intelligence. And no salvage being on the left there is not a good thing. I also love how Obama is admitting that black people will vote for him simply because he’s black. Reply salvage on June 18, 2008 at 6:23 am Thanks to all for proving my point with such eloquence. Reply Fit fit on June 18, 2008 at 6:28 am It’s fun to cherry pick polls! How about them apples? Reply Mike's America on June 18, 2008 at 7:00 am pick enough cherries and you can bake a pie Fit Fit. As for Salvage and his “Obama is far too smart for the average American ” comment from Salvage, all I can say is that Obama must not be too bright, even after all that affirmative action, if he can’t speak without a teleprompter: Unless of course 7 seconds of ” ah, ah, ah, I mean the uh first of all uh I, I, I” was some sort of code that only the secret Obama code ring passed out to Salvage and the Obamatons could decode. Reply Fit fit on June 18, 2008 at 7:39 am There’s so many to pick from it’s easier to consolidate. I like pie. Reply john Ryan on June 18, 2008 at 11:08 am Gallup is a pretty good pollster but I think it is better to rely on an average of all polls show, like what RealClearPolitics offers. Their average shows Obama up by 5% and perhaps as important also trending up. They also show the MOST current Gallup daily tracking (6/15 -6/17) poll has Obama up by 5% so apparently gallup polls are also showing an upward trend for Obama. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ Reply john Ryan on June 18, 2008 at 11:09 am here is another view of McCain v Obama from an average of polls http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html Reply Fit fit on June 18, 2008 at 11:21 am john You’re missing Mike’s point. He has an unsourced reference to an Obama campaign advisor who stated they should be up by ten points. Anything less than that means he’s losing. Reply Missy on June 18, 2008 at 12:05 pm Interesting. Gallup says Obama is trending up? From the Gallup site: “Obama has averaged a four percent advantage over McCain……though in the immediate days after Clinton conceded the nomination Obama led by as much as seven points.” Their lastest polling had Obama up by 5, used registered voters, +-2 margin of error. Rasmussen said, “Both results reflect a single point gain for McCain and a continued fade for Obama’s bounce.” They used likely voters, had Obama up by three with a +- 2 margin of error. Zogby/Reuters said, “but his recent win of his party’s nomination has not produced a big bounce.” They used likely voters, polled on a weekend, had Obama up by 5 with a +-3 margin of error. ABC said, “The presumptive nominee emerged from his primary season battle……with improved personal ratings overall, but with no appreciable gain in the head-to-head competition with McCain.” Also week end polling, random sample of adults, had Obama up by four with a margin of error of +- 3. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html Just wondering where all those 18 million Hillary voters are. Reply Mike's America on June 18, 2008 at 12:11 pm Nice try John Ryan and Fit Fit. If you guys keep spinning, you’re going to get dizzy and fall down. However you want to spin it, Obama hasn’t received the bounce that his own advisers expected. And if Fit thinks that’s unsourced, he should go consult the news post Hillary. I’m tired of doing his homework for FF and he STILL gets a failing grade. Reply Fit fit on June 18, 2008 at 1:10 pm Mike, This is spinning: If anything, his lead over McCain shrank in most polls. or just flat out lying. All I did was post some links to other polls. I offered no “creative” interpretation of their meaning. Reply Mike's America on June 18, 2008 at 1:14 pm Fit Fit: The more you underline Obama’s poor post-Hillary performance the more you highlight Obama’s weakness. Sit down before you fall down. Reply Fit fit on June 18, 2008 at 1:24 pm Okay, I’m guessing you didn’t check the links or you’re just in denial. Either way I’ll just sit down now… Reply bbartlog on June 18, 2008 at 1:40 pm Headline: ‘Obama not beating McCain as badly as some people said he would!’. Break out the champagne and party hats! Reply Mike's America on June 18, 2008 at 1:42 pm Fit Fit: I’ve been reading Real Clear Politics long before you posted the links. You seem to prefer to IGNORE the point here. And that point is that Obama did NOT get the 10 point bump OVER his current polling position that his advisers expected. If you are going to play games, be prepared to lose. You lost. Reply Fit fit on June 18, 2008 at 1:54 pm Mike, You’re drunk again, aren’t you? I didn’t post any RCP polls. That’s the other guy. I still don’t see a link showing who claimed a ten point bump. Produce evidence that an Obama adviser predicted a full ten point bump and I’ll man up and admit you’re right on that point. I also don’t see how you can honestly make the claim that his lead shrank in most polls. Does honesty hold any value to you? Be a man and admit you were stretching. Reply Uddercha0s on June 18, 2008 at 2:24 pm I like pie. So does Michelle Obama: “The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.” Reply David on June 18, 2008 at 3:30 pm Regardless of which poll is quoted (or using the RCP average), both McCain and Obama are polling at or within the margin of error. The other analogy that could be considered is that Gore (2000) and Kerry (2004) had similar leads at this same point in time, and the electoral map about even, slight lead Democrat. Of course, we know the results of those two elections. Whether this election match-up is shaping up to have a similar trend/outcome remains to be seen. The wildcard – both presumptive nominees don’t exactly enjoy solid party support. Reply Aye on June 18, 2008 at 4:41 pm Here’s an interesting take on the polls: How Much Trouble Does Obama Have in Ohio? However, two polls account for Obama’s lead in the two sites’ Ohio averages, and may actually be an early warning sign for the potential trouble Barack Obama could have in that key battleground state. While both of the polls show Obama with large leads over McCain — one shows Obama with an 11-point lead over John McCain, and the other shows Obama with a nine-point lead over his Repub rival — the political breakdowns for the polls’ respondents are eye-popping. Public Policy Polling, which has Obama with an 11-point lead in the state, breaks down the poll’s respondents thusly: Dem 55%, Repub 30% — a 25-point margin for the Dems. (A March PPP poll showing McCain with an eight-point lead over Obama broke down: Dem 48%, Repub 32% — a 16-point Dem margin.) A SurveyUSA poll, which shows Obama with a nine-point lead in Ohio, breaks down the poll’s respondents like this: Dem 52%, Repub 28% — a 24-point margin favoring the Dems. (A March SurveyUSA poll showing McCain with a seven-point lead over Obama broke down: Dem 44%, Repub 34% — for a 10-point Dem margin.) The wide swings in the four polls aside, having only 11- and 9- point leads while holding large margins in political identification like 24 and 25 points would be troubling for any candidate, even if they were accurate descriptions of the electorate, but when those margins don’t hold up to historical data — well, there’s even more trouble. *** The last time the Dems won a presidential race in Ohio was 1976, when Jimmy Carter beat Gerald Ford by just over 11,000 votes, or 0.28%. The last time margins for the Dems in Ohio looked liked those found in these polls was 1964, just one year after JFK’s assassination, when LBJ beat Goldwater in Ohio by almost 26% — in a year when LBJ won nationally in a landslide, by 22.5%. *** It’s as if historical results no longer matter. These polls spell trouble for Sen. Obama in Ohio. Reply Mike's America on June 18, 2008 at 4:43 pm The bottom line, and something that Fit Fit fails to grasp, is that every candidate typically gets a bounce when he secures the nomination. Obama has not. Fit Fit can throw all the temper tantrums he wants but he can’t change reality. Reply BarbaraS on June 18, 2008 at 5:04 pm The media use these polls as news and try to convince the electorate that more people support their guy. That’s why the imbalance of dems and republicans. Another commie trick. They don’t realize the blogs will find out what the demographics are and report them. Evidently the media is full of these type of people i.e. liars. But then we already knew that. Reply doug on June 18, 2008 at 6:21 pm … That is almost exactly where we have Barack Obama’s numbers after a series of new polls from Quinnipiac. In Pennsylvania, Obama leads by 12 points — up from 6 last month. His Ohio lead is 6 points — he had trailed McCain by 4 points before. And then there is Florida, where Quinnipiac has Obama ahead by 4 points. Barack Obama has never before led a Florida poll — not against John McCain, nor against Hillary Clinton — so this is something of a watershed moment. … http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/todays-polls-618.html Yes, it is; thus it definitely appears that, one, Obama’s newly registering ‘army’ is strong in swing states and, two, Hillary’s support is strongly building behind O. in swing states. Reply Fit fit on June 18, 2008 at 7:55 pm I didn’t realize you guys censored same the way all the liberal blogs do… get a spine Mike. Reply Mike's America on June 18, 2008 at 8:09 pm Fit Fit: I am under no obligation to permit you to spam the comment streams here with your bile. If you don’t like it … tough! Reply Fit fit on June 19, 2008 at 5:33 am There was no bile in the last comment you censored, anyone who got the chance to read it knows. Reply Aye on June 19, 2008 at 6:08 am Fit fit, I didn’t get to read the comment to which you are referring unless it was the one where you accused Mike of being a liar and a drunk. Other than that dose of bile I missed the rest. If you will go to the top of the screen and click on the “Authors” button your computer will display a list of names and bios for you. The people listed are essentially the owners and/or key holders of this site. They, and they alone, get to decide what stays and what goes. Their names are essentially above the door and they hold the keys here. They draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable. Quite simply, and perhaps a bit more directly, if you don’t like the standards set by the Authors here then don’t post. If you find that this is not a place which allows you free expression go and set up a place of your very own. There’s a great big Internet out there and someplace there’s a spot where you can do whatever you please. This, however, is not it. This is one of the most tolerant and flexible sites that I have ever had the good fortune to be a part of. Just in my short time here I have seen Sky55110, Philly Steve, Steve (the other one), Savage, and most recently, Juanita/Jaz/Tia/Theresa/newnew/Q (a sock-puppet quintet), among others. So, if this isn’t for you, if the expectations are not achievable, then feel free to pursue other options because the persecution complex is getting tiresome. Reply Fit fit on June 19, 2008 at 6:16 am My comments (more or less): Let me help you: While I may have been mistaken about the Obama advisers, the conventional wisdom was ten points. The bottom line, and something that Fit Fit fails to grasp, is that every candidate typically gets a bounce when he secures the nomination. Obama has not. I probably overstated myself on the decline of Obama’s lead overall, however there is an obvious trend in the Gallup poll. Fit Fit can throw all the temper tantrums he wants but he can’t change reality. Hardly offensive or beyond the pall. Reply Aye on June 19, 2008 at 6:26 am Well, you conveniently left out the part where you called him a liar and being drunk. I guess that falls into the “less” part. Again, neither of us get to decide where the line is between acceptable and unacceptable because our names are not above the door. There is a certain level of decorum by which we should all govern ourselves. Do those lines get blurred or nudged at times? Yes, I’ve done it myself but I can guarantee that if I ever get edited or dressed down for being over the line you won’t hear me complaining. Reply Fit fit on June 19, 2008 at 6:32 am I conventiently didn’t have to include that because it’s still posted… I don’t feel I’m whining, just trying to plead my case. Reply Mike's America on June 19, 2008 at 6:36 am Fit Fit: If you are going to continue wasting the readers time here today then be prepared to see your comments deleted. As Obama often says, we aren’t going to tolerate these “distractions.” Reply bbartlog on June 19, 2008 at 8:07 am Fortunately we can actually evaluate the individual claims made in the post if we want to keep score! 1) No Bounce for Obama! (headline) True in one chosen poll. Aggregates of polls (generally considered more reliable than an individual poll) linked by others seem to show a bounce (see also pollster.com). And in fact most of the news and opinion articles on this acknowledge the existence of a bump – they just comment on it being smaller than Kerry’s or smaller than expected. 2) Obama’s advisers expected that […] Obama would get a 10 point bounce The link you have here is to an article that you also wrote, as far as I can tell. It’s not unreasonable to suppose that they hoped this, since Kerry *did* get a ten point bounce, but as far as actual substantiation there is no evidence that you didn’t just make this up. Google turns up nothing. 3) If anything, his lead over McCain shrank in most polls. Pollster.com and every other aggregator I’ve checked show otherwise. This looks like pure wishful thinking on your part. The rest of the post is color and speculation about Hillary supporters which may be right but can’t really be shown to be true or false (trivially true for *some* supporters, trivially false for all). Of three claims you made, two are false and one is unverifiable. Getting huffy with Fit fit and proclaiming things like ‘If you are going to play games, be prepared to lose. You lost. doesn’t change that. Nota bene, people who offer convincing arguments don’t have to proclaim that their adversaries lost, because it’s already obvious. Reply ChrisG on June 19, 2008 at 12:00 pm Bush should really think twice before doing this! Reply doug on June 20, 2008 at 2:58 pm Now that’s a bounce!! I guess Hillary leaving the race did help. http://www.newsweek.com/id/142465?from=rss Reply Aye on June 20, 2008 at 3:14 pm Doug, You may or may not be versed in statistics but the internals of this “poll” are laughable. The total sample: 896 registered voters Distribution of the sample: 231 – Identified Republican 324 – Identified Democrat 307 – Supposed Independents Hence the result you are so gleeful over. RCP has a composite of all of the current polls. It shows that this release from Newsweek is a definite anomaly. Reply Mike's America on June 20, 2008 at 6:46 pm Doug: A headline is not a bounce! Note that Obama’s advisers expected to be 10 points HIGHER than they were BEFORE Hillary suspended. That hasn’t happened. And note his paragraph from your link: Most other national polls have shown Obama with a 4 to 5 point lead over McCain so far. Random statistical error can explain some of the difference in poll results. The NEWSWEEK survey of 1,010 adults nationwide on June 18 and 19, 2008, has a margin of error of 4 points. Perhaps Bbartlog needs to read that as well considering that he said that “Aggregates of polls (generally considered more reliable than an individual poll) linked by others seem to show a bounce “ I don’t know what poll aggregate you are looking at Bbart, but I don’t see a 10 point bounce in this one: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/charts.html Seems that every post on Obama has attracted the type of responses we used to see from the the Paulbots. Is there a correlation? Reply Trackbacks/Pingbacks Danger Signs, Schmanger Signs | Comments from Left Field - [...] at Memeorandum: Political Punch, Flopping Aces, TownHall Blog, Redstate and Wake up America Share and Enjoy: These icons link…Click to Edit – SaveCancelDelete Submit a Comment Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment * Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.